Most of the observed increase in atmospheric CO2 is not anthropogenic.

CO2 movements and concentrations are largely determined by nature, not man; consequently, any cuts we make to our CO2 emissions will not have the desired effect, and are a costly waste of time.

CO2, whether man-made or not, does not 'drive' the climate system.

Professor Murry Salby has been vilified by enviro-alarmists and the left for his scientific results. Salby was disenfranchised and exiled from academia in Australia for daring to speak such “sacrilege.” (see Graphic)

In a case similar to many others we have seen in Australia, and across the west, he was the subject of University hate and was finally sacked while he was on a lecture tour in Europe; his employer, Macquarie University of NSW, sacking him from his position as Professor of Climate Science. The University board cancelled his return ticket home, stranding him in Paris. All Salby's work was confiscated and has still not been returned to him.
(See this blog - Murry Salby and Mac Uni and Mac Uni's reply)

The pursuit of genuine Science in the field of climate - and free speech are Dead in most Western Universities:Other cases where top scientists were vilified and sacked or demoted by a University for the results of their science or for their views on the climate include:Bob Carter, Murry Salby Lennart Bengtsson, David Legates, George Taylor, Caleb Rossiter, Bjorn Lomborg, Henk Tennekes, Askel Winn-Nielsen, Alfonso Sutera, Anonio Speranza and scores of others.

Comments

Here are some of the people responsible for keeping denial in the media. It is a small group that you are following.There is one discredited climatologist and the others are from other science fields i.e, engineering, astrophysics, geography etc giving there opinion with no sound climate background. There are some people and blogsters paid by big oil to keep denial going 60% of the American public agree the climate is warming. Nice to know who is duping you, eh? http://insideclimatenews.org/news/12032015/leaked-email-reveals-whos-who-list-climate-denialists-merchants-of-doubt-oreskes-fred-singer-marc-morano-steve-milloy Hmmm...wonder who the real sheeple are?

From YOUR link, Anonymous, and probably the only bit of truth in that hackpiece:

"The "claim" of the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that humans are almost solely responsible for global warming "is not proven except in their computer models and cannot be proven until we understand how much climate varies naturally"

As to "no sound climate background" Bagley rules out engineering (Ex IPCC head Pachauri);astrophysics (Ex NASA:GISS head James Hansen)

Hmmm....the two top people in the CAGW hoax are ruled out by Bagley's rules because they have "no sound climate background."

It really sticks in my craw that people like " anonymous" hypocritically blame 'big oil" for CO2 while still using computers to post online, and presumably to run their washiers, driers, ovens, and refrigerators. They're too stupid to realize they'd literally be living in the "dark ages" if it wasn't for fossil fuel.

Arguing about atmospheric CO2 is a great distraction technique to keep real scientists chasing their tails. The oceans are warming. CO2 can't possibly warm the oceans. CO2 absorbs at 15 microns which is consistent with -80 degrees C, and 15 microns doesn't penetrate the oceans, it fact it causes cooling surface evaporation. Simply explain what is warming the oceans and you explain what is warming the atmosphere above it.

Wow - some of you CAGW fanatics seem to have forgotten that any scientific theory must be proven correct in ALL facets before being accepted. That is, if it's factually correct then it must jive with known physics. That's why actual scientists ENLIST the aid and skepticism of other related scientific specialties. Engineers, astrophysicists, geologists and geographers are most certainly allowed.

Or, perhaps you would prefer that the Pope give his blessing. Is that somewhat more palatable?

Popular Posts

The increase in CO2 is not due to humans, therefore alarmism and all the money spent on it has no basis. Anthony Cox This is a key issue: whether humans are responsible for all or most of the increase in atmospheric CO2. If they are not then it does not matter if alarmists believe that CO2 is the dominant greenhouse gas, which it is not because the increase is natural. Human CO2 is a very small % of the total CO2 going into the atmosphere, The % of human CO2 going into the atmosphere is shown by Figure 7.3, AR4, 3.67% (218.2 GT divided by 8 GT): Figure 7.3 AR4: Of the total CO2 emissions 98.5% are reabsorbed: EIA, Table 3 2004: The reabsorption of CO2 does not distinguish between human and natural CO2, so the human contribution to the increase is 3.67% of 1.5%. This amount, the human contribution has not changed in 150 years. The human contribution to the increase in atmospheric CO2 is called the airborne fraction. The AF has not changed: https://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/11/k…

Opinion by Anthony Cox
I wrote before about the ABC’s bias and the real
cost of the ABC to the Australian community. Since then the Abbott
government has announced reasonable budget cuts but the ABC has sunk further
into its betrayal of its Charter and of the Australian community.
In a recent poll about the farcical China/US deal about
emissions the ABC’s The Drum initially showed this result: 12/11/2014: China and the US have struck a new deal to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Do you think Australia will need to adjust its climate change policies as a result? No 55% Yes 44% Unsure 1%

15205 votes counted
Given the ABC’s Left/Green readership a remarkable result.
However shortly the result
was changed to this: 12/11/2014: China and the US have struck a new deal to limit greenhouse gas
emissions. Do you think Australia will need to adjust its climate change
policies as a result?Yes 76% No 23% Unsure 1% 6001
votes counted
How could you trust an organisation which lies like that and
distorts public …